PERSONAL ATTITUDES AND MISCONCEPTIONS OF OCCUPATIONAL PHYSICIANS HAMPER PNEUMOCOCCAL VACCINATION PROGRAMS IN HEALTHCARE WORKERS: INSIGHTS FROM A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlo Signorelli
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Pneumococcal Vaccination ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Vaccination Programs ◽  
Occupational Physicians ◽  
Personal Attitudes

scholarly journals Understanding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Pakistan: The paradigm of Confidence, Convenience and Complacency; A Cross-sectional study.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naveen Siddique Sheikh ◽  
Mumtaz Touseef ◽  
Riddah Sultan ◽  
Kanwal Hassan Cheema ◽  
Sidra Shafiq Cheema ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Population ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Herd Immunity ◽  
Population Data ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Vaccine Uptake ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Vaccination Programs

Background and objectives: Vaccine hesitancy is a big obstacle for vaccination programs, as is anticipated for the COVID-19 vaccination program, resulting in low uptake of vaccines thereby hindering the process of reaching herd immunity. Bearing this in mind the current study was aimed to explore the determinants of vaccine hesitancy amongst the Pakistani population. Methodology: A cross-sectional study was carried out from the 23rd-31st January 2021. The conceptual framework of the study was based on the 3Cs (Confidence, Convenience, Complacency) model. Google-forms-based questionnaire was disseminated amongst the general population. Data collected were entered into SPSS version 26 and analyzed. Results: Of the 421 participants, 68.4% were females. Non-healthcare workers were 55.8% of respondents. Vaccine hesitant individuals, 26.13% reported they were very unlikely to get vaccinated. Vaccine was not safe as it came out too fast was agreed upon by 12.6% individuals, 50.6% were worried about experiencing side-effects, 18% believed vaccine will not offer protection and 5.9% believed vaccine would cause death. Low Practice of SOP in non-Healthcare workers was the strongest contributor to vaccine hesitancy (OR: 5.338, p=0.040, 95% CI: 1.082-26.330) followed by High complacency (p=0.026) and Moderate Complacency (OR: 0.212, p=0.007, 95% CI: 0.069-0.654) towards COVID-19 vaccination. In Healthcare workers the strongest contributor to vaccine hesitancy was having a Moderate Confidence (OR: 0.323, p=0.042, 95% CI: 0.109-0.958) in the vaccine followed by Moderate Convenience (OR: 0.304, p=0.049, 95% CI: 0.093-0.993) for vaccination Conclusion: Campaigning and communication strategies to reaffirm confidence in the COVID-19 vaccine and educating the general population about the vaccine could lead to increased perception of vaccine safety and effectiveness thereby restoring confidence in vaccine and decreasing vaccine hesitancy. Likewise, working to increase vaccine convenience and decreasing complacency towards the COVID-19 vaccine would translate into high vaccine uptake.

Psychosocial Impact of Covid-19 Pandemic on Frontline Healthcare Workers in Pakistan: A Cross-Sectional Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Quratul-Ain Zafar
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Emotional Distress ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Psychosocial Impact ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Study Group ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Frontline Healthcare Workers

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on frontline healthcare workers in Pakistan in terms of psychological factors emotional distress, insomnia, and burnout. Study Design: Observational cross-sectional study. Place and Duration of Study: This study was conducted at different hospitals across Pakistan and data collection was carried out from 15th June 2020 till 15th August 2020. Material and Methods: This was a questionnaire-based study aiming to compare the levels of burnout and emotional distress between frontline COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 healthcare workers. Any physician, nurse, and other healthcare workers were recruited from emergency care units and Covid-19 care units (target group), and non-COVID-19 care units (control group). Participation was voluntary and participants had to complete self-reported questionnaires and scales. A mixed-mode data collection was carried out, either in paper or web-based form to ensure maximum participation. Results: The independent t-test showed a statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding depression, stress, and insomnia. The study group showed higher scores for these factors than the control group. Chi-square test of association revealed significant scores of burnout and professional fulfillment in both groups. There was a higher prevalence of burnout in the study group than in the control group. Conclusion: This study concludes that there was a significant psychosocial impact of the Covid-19 pandemic in the frontline healthcare workers measured in terms of emotional distress, insomnia, and burnout.

Prevalence of Thyroid Diseases in an Occupationally Radiation Exposed Group: A Cross-Sectional Study in a University Hospital of Southern Italy

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 803-808 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luigi Vimercati ◽  
Luigi De Maria ◽  
Francesca Mansi ◽  
Antonio Caputi ◽  
Giovanni M. Ferri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ionizing Radiation ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Southern Italy ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Thyroid Diseases ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Exposed Workers

Background: Thyroid diseases occur more frequently in people exposed to ionizing radiation, but the relationship between occupational exposure to ionizing radiation and thyroid pathologies still remains unclear. Objective: To evaluate the prevalence of thyroid diseases in healthcare workers exposed to low-level ionizing radiation compared with a control group working at the University Hospital of Bari, Southern Italy, and living in the same geographical area, characterized by mild iodine deficiency. Methods: We ran a cross-sectional study to investigate whether healthcare workers exposed to ionizing radiation had a higher prevalence of thyroid diseases. Four hundred and forty-four exposed healthcare workers (241 more exposed, or “A Category”, and 203 less exposed, or “B Category”) and 614 nonexposed healthcare workers were enrolled during a routine examination at the Occupational Health Unit. They were asked to fill in an anamnestic questionnaire and undergo a physical examination, serum determination of fT3, fT4 and TSH, anti-TPO ab and anti-TG ab and ultrasound neck scan. Thyroid nodules were submitted to fine needle aspiration biopsy when indicated. Results: The prevalence of thyroid diseases was statistically higher in the exposed workers compared to controls (40% vs 29%, adPR 1.65; IC95% 1.34-2.07). In particular, the thyroid nodularity prevalence in the exposed group was approximately twice as high as that in the controls (29% vs 13%; adPR 2.83; IC95% 2.12-3.8). No statistically significant association was found between exposure to ionizing radiation and other thyroid diseases. Conclusion: In our study, mild ionizing radiation-exposed healthcare workers had a statistically higher prevalence of thyroid diseases than the control group. The results are likely due to a closer and more meticulous health surveillance programme carried out in the ionising radiation-exposed workers, allowing them to identify thyroid alterations earlier than non-exposed health staff.

scholarly journals SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and asymptomatic viral carriage in healthcare workers: a cross-sectional study

Thorax ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 75 (12) ◽  
pp. 1089-1094 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Shields ◽  
Sian E Faustini ◽  
Marisol Perez-Toledo ◽  
Sian Jossi ◽  
Erin Aldera ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Venous Blood ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
University Hospitals ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
General Internal ◽  
Increased Risk

ObjectiveTo determine the rates of asymptomatic viral carriage and seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in healthcare workers.DesignA cross-sectional study of asymptomatic healthcare workers undertaken on 24/25 April 2020.SettingUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (UHBFT), UK.Participants545 asymptomatic healthcare workers were recruited while at work. Participants were invited to participate via the UHBFT social media. Exclusion criteria included current symptoms consistent with COVID-19. No potential participants were excluded.InterventionParticipants volunteered a nasopharyngeal swab and a venous blood sample that were tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA and anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein antibodies, respectively. Results were interpreted in the context of prior illnesses and the hospital departments in which participants worked.Main outcome measureProportion of participants demonstrating infection and positive SARS-CoV-2 serology.ResultsThe point prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 viral carriage was 2.4% (n=13/545). The overall seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was 24.4% (n=126/516). Participants who reported prior symptomatic illness had higher seroprevalence (37.5% vs 17.1%, χ2=21.1034, p<0.0001) and quantitatively greater antibody responses than those who had remained asymptomatic. Seroprevalence was greatest among those working in housekeeping (34.5%), acute medicine (33.3%) and general internal medicine (30.3%), with lower rates observed in participants working in intensive care (14.8%). BAME (Black, Asian and minority ethnic) ethnicity was associated with a significantly increased risk of seropositivity (OR: 1.92, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.23, p=0.01). Working on the intensive care unit was associated with a significantly lower risk of seropositivity compared with working in other areas of the hospital (OR: 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.78, p=0.02).Conclusions and relevanceWe identify differences in the occupational risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 between hospital departments and confirm asymptomatic seroconversion occurs in healthcare workers. Further investigation of these observations is required to inform future infection control and occupational health practices.

scholarly journals Infectivity of healthcare workers diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) approximately 2 weeks after onset of symptoms: A cross-sectional study

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Yves Longtin ◽  
Hugues Charest ◽  
Caroline Quach ◽  
Patrice Savard ◽  
Mariana Baz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Symptom Onset ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Positive Culture ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Viral Shedding ◽  
Viral Culture ◽  
Respiratory Coronavirus ◽  
Respiratory Specimens

Abstract We performed viral culture of respiratory specimens in 118 severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)–infected healthcare workers (HCWs), ∼2 weeks after symptom onset. Only 1 HCW (0.8%) had a positive culture. No factors for prolonged viral shedding were identified. Infectivity is resolved in nearly all HCWs ∼2 weeks after symptom onset.

scholarly journals Healthcare Workers’ Perspectives on the Upcoming COVID-19 Vaccine in Terms of Their Exposure to the Influenza Vaccine in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 465
Author(s):  
Leena R. Baghdadi ◽  
Shatha G. Alghaihb ◽  
Alanoud A. Abuhaimed ◽  
Dania M. Alkelabi ◽  
Rawan S. Alqahtani
Keyword(s):  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Influenza Vaccine ◽  
Work Experience ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Seasonal Influenza ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Seasonal Influenza Vaccine ◽  
History Of

In 2019, a novel severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19)) caused a global pandemic. There was an urgent need to develop a vaccine against COVID-19 to reduce its spread and economic burden. The main objective of this study was to understand the attitudes and concerns of healthcare workers (HCWs) towards the upcoming COVID-19 vaccine, whether their decision was influenced by their history of taking the seasonal influenza vaccine, and factors that influence the acceptance of the upcoming COVID-19 vaccine. This was a cross-sectional study conducted in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. We selected and surveyed 356 HCWs via an electronic self-administered questionnaire. A total of 61.16% of HCWs were willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, and 55.9% of them had received the seasonal influenza vaccine in the preceding year (2019–2020). The strongest predictors for taking the COVID-19 vaccine were the HCWs’ belief that the COVID-19 vaccine would be safe, needed even for healthy people, that all HCWs should be vaccinated against COVID-19, and that HCWs will have time to take the vaccine. Being female, being middle aged, having <5 years of work experience, having no fear of injections, and being a non-smoker were predictive factors for taking the upcoming COVID-19 vaccine. No associations were found between the intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine and a history of taking the seasonal influenza vaccine.

scholarly journals Socioeconomic and Behavioral Correlates of COVID-19 Infections among Hospital Workers in the Greater Jakarta Area, Indonesia: A Cross-Sectional Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (10) ◽  
pp. 5048
Author(s):  
Adrianna Bella ◽  
Mochamad Thoriq Akbar ◽  
Gita Kusnadi ◽  
Olivia Herlinda ◽  
Putri Aprilia Regita ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Worker ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Hospital Staff ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Household Size ◽  
Risk Of Infection ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Hospital Workers ◽  
Behavioral Correlates ◽  
Cross Sectional

(1) Background: because of close contacts with COVID-19 patients, hospital workers are among the highest risk groups for infection. This study examined the socioeconomic and behavioral correlates of COVID-19 infection among hospital workers in Indonesia, the country hardest-hit by the disease in the Southeast Asia region. (2) Methods: we conducted a cross-sectional study, which collected data from 1397 hospital staff from eight hospitals in the Greater Jakarta area during April–July 2020. The data was collected using an online self-administered questionnaire and Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) tests. We employed descriptive statistics and adjusted and unadjusted logistic regressions to analyze the data of hospital workers as well as the subgroups of healthcare and non-healthcare workers. (3) Results: from a total of 1397 hospital staff in the study, 22 (1.6%) were infected. In terms of correlates, being a healthcare worker (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 8.31, 95% CI 1.27–54.54) and having a household size of more than five (AOR = 4.09, 1.02–16.43) were significantly associated with a higher risk of infection. On the other hand, those with middle- and upper-expenditure levels were shown to have a lower risk of infection (AOR = 0.06, 0.01–0.66). Behavioral factors associated with COVID-19 infection among healthcare and non-healthcare workers included knowledge of standard personal protective equipment (PPE) (AOR = 0.08, 0.01–0.54) and application of the six-step handwashing technique (AOR = 0.32, 0.12–0.83). (4) Conclusion: among hospital staff, correlates of COVID-19 infection included being a healthcare worker, household size, expenditure level, knowledge and use of PPE, and application of appropriate hand washing techniques.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document